Let's not because looking at a single incident or the reaction to said incident implies that those involved represent some majority of people when, in either case, these are extreme examples of human behavior and don't represent the rest of us. Why do we keep taking extreme examples of things and try to pretend they apply to the rest of society when they don't?
Because "fighting back" is considered cool and edgy and it's also because those supporting it don't have to deal with the courts and punishments like those who do it will face...and they won't have to face the potential job loss or difficulty to get a job that will happen from having an assault on your record.
In the end, if someone says something racist and you respond with violence, then you are being every bit the animal that the racist thinks you are. You simply justify their perceptions and make them stronger. In the late 60's black people rioted in multiple cities and it set back their movements for years and decades since it just renewed this perception that they're criminals and animals. This is the same thing on a smaller scale. Acting to racism with anger and violence will only get you more and return. It never helps things.
If people stopped reacting to and ignored such slurs then those slurs would lose power. But as long as people continue to flip out, get violent and throw tantrums over simple name-calling, then will always get more of it. They're just giving the racists the reaction they want to see.
But, no, this isn't cool or hip so reacting with anger is cheered and supported, despite the fact that it never works to solve everything. Great job, millenials.
I'm gonna have to disagree.
I think it's glossing over some pretty awful patches in history to say that riots "set back their movements". This extends far beyond the realms of "simple name-calling", and to refer to either one of these points in history, the riots or the reaction to the n-word, as going too far is just tunnel vision on a level that's hard to try and explain to someone.
Violence has practical and effective uses in history. Acting like it doesn't is part of the problem. Because you're effectively making a choice to continue not listening...which is part of the reason why riots and violent outbursts happen in the first place. This isn't some new phenomenon that's happened in the past decade. This is a word that has been used for hundreds of years to disparage an entire race of people. And black people are consistently put into this purgatorial choice where passive response is unfairly reprimanded and aggressive response puts onlookers in this awkward self-appointed mindset where they think they can claim that as validation for everything we've held as repugnant stereotypes (that they're nothing more than animals) for centuries.
I think it falls on white people to stop being fucking idiots. This is a tired conversation. It's long been established that this word is in no way appropriate or funny or lighthearted. Black people are tired of asking when it's going to be over and done with. They've asked politely, they've asked violently, for centuries, and for some people...nothing changes. At this point, who gives a fuck what the racist thinks? Why should that guy stop to think about the perception that this man holds? Why should he harbor any respect for his opinion of him when it's abundantly clear that it won't be reciprocated?
The violence doesn't prove anything that the racist white dude thinks of him. The punch was a very clear "this is really old hate that my ancestors, my brothers, my sisters have dealt with all our lives and I want to shut you up as fast as I can because I'm really tired of seeing nothing happen". And you know what? He got, just for a moment, a bit of silence. And he got to be the one to make it happen.
I say good on him.